SELECTED WORKS OF JAWAHARLAL NEHRU · SELECTED WORKS OF JAWAHARLAL NEHRU Series II Volume 48 (April 1 - 30, 1959) To Rajendra Prasad: Foreign Policy Restraint1 April 2, 1959 My dear

SELECTED WORKS OF JAWAHARLAL NEHRU

Series II

Volume 48

(April 1 - 30, 1959)

To Rajendra Prasad: Foreign Policy Restraint1

April 2, 1959

My dear Rajendra Babu,

Thank you for your letter of the 1st April.

The course you suggest for us to take would mean our breaking diplomatic

relations with China almost immediately, with all the consequences that

flow from it. I do not think that would be advisable. As a matter of fact, the

statements I have made in Parliament have clearly shown where our

sympathies lie. The next few days are likely to see some further

developments.

I hope to discuss this matter with you on your return to Delhi.

Yours sincerely,

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

In the Lok Sabha: Arrival of the Dalai Lama2

The Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs (Shri Jawaharlal Nehru):

The other day, three days ago, I think, when I was speaking about recent

happenings in Tibet, I mentioned that I would keep the House informed of

every fresh development. In the last two days, day before yesterday and

1 Letter

2 Statement on the Dalai Lama, 3 April 1959. Lok Sabha Debates, Second Series, Vol.

XXVIII, cols 9559-9561.

yesterday, we have been receiving a number of messages. They were often

delayed because they had to come through a rather devious route.

Yesterday I was thinking of informing the House of a certain development,

but then I hesitated to do so, because I wanted it to be fully confirmed; I

was waiting for some details. We received them last evening. We could

have issued this news to the Press last evening, but I thought I should

inform the House first and then the Press can have it.

The facts are that on the 1st April, i.e. day before yesterday morning, we

received a message via Shillong dated 31st March evening that an emissary

with a message from the Dalai Lama had arrived at our border check-post

at Chutangmu in the North East Frontier Agency. He had arrived there on

the 29th March stating that the Dalai Lama requested us for political asylum

and that he expected to reach the border on the 30th March, i.e. soon after

he himself had come. We received the message on the 1st. The same

evening, i.e. 1st April evening, a message was received by us again via

Shillong dated 1st April that the Dalai Lama with his small party of 8 had

crossed into our territory on the evening of the 31st March.3

Expecting that some such development might occur, we had instructed the

various check-posts round about there what to do in case such a

development takes place. So, when he crossed over into our territory, he

was received by our Assistant Political Officer of the Tawang sub-division,

which is a part of the Kameng Frontier Division of the North East Frontier

Agency. A little later, the rest of his party, the entourage, came in. The

total number who have come with him or after him is 80. From the 2nd

evening, i.e. yesterday, we learn that this Party in two groups is moving

towards Tawang, which is the headquarters of that sub-division and that he

is expected to reach Tawang the day after tomorrow, Sunday, 5th evening.

Shri Braj Raj Singh: I want a clarification, which is a very important one.

3 For other statements on the Dalai Lama's arrival, see items 119, 120,122 and 128

Shri Khadilkar: I want a little more information.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker: This is the information that the Prime Minister has got

just at present. If he gets more, he has promised us that he will place it

before the House.

Shri Braj Raj Singh: I want a clarification. There is a news in the Press that

the New China Agency had published the very same news yesterday. How

is it that the Government of India here did not get this confirmation even

till the last evening? The Prime Minister himself said that he knew the

information when he was making a statement here yesterday, but he could

get the confirmation only last evening. May I know whether we are going to

give political asylum to the Dalai Lama?4

Shri Khadilkar: We have given the Dalai Lama asylum here...

Shri Nath Pai: We do not know if we have given him.

An Hon. Member: We have.

Shri Khadilkar: I want a clarification. The Dalai Lama is the temporal and

spiritual head of Tibet. Does the asylum confer the same right on him and

will he be functioning in the same capacity on the Indian soil? That is a very

serious matter.

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: So far as Mr. Khadilkar's question is concerned,

about spiritual rights, etc., I cannot answer it. It is a complicated matter

4 See SWJNISS/47/pp. 584-585

which will have to be considered. But there is no doubt that he will receive

respectful treatment.

Shri Naushir Bharucha:5 Is it a fact that the Dalai Lama was injured?

Shri Jawabarlal Nehru: No, Sir; he is quite healthy.

As for the other question, I myself stated that we knew it da y before

yesterday evening-in fact, if I may say so, I was not here then, but we

knew about his having crossed the frontier, but we wanted certain

confirmation about details, whether the whole party had crossed over,

where they were, etc., before I mentioned it to this House. Yesterday

morning, I was not in a position to do so, although I knew that he had

crossed the border. In the evening I was, but I wanted to wait for the

meeting of the Lok Sabha today to say so, instead of giving the news to the

press.

***

To Saiyid Fazl Ali: Public Feelings about Tibet6

April 3, 1959

My dear Fazl Ali,

Thank you for your letter of April 1st. As you must know, we have already

agreed to give political asylum to the Dalai Lama, and he and his party are

in India now.

I think that we have acted rightly. But, apart from my feelings, the strength

of public feeling in India is so tremendous on this subject that no

Government can ignore it. That feeling, of course, is not merely about the

5 Independent, Lok Sabha MP from East Khandesh, Bombay State.

6 Letter.

Dalai Lama, but about events in Tibet. And, to some extent, I share that

feeling, though I have to express myself with restraint.

Yours sincerely,

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

To the Dalai Lama: Welcome7

I received Your Holiness' message dated the 26th March only yesterday on

my return to Delhi. My colleagues and I welcome you and send you

greetings on your safe arrival in India. We shall be happy to afford the

necessary facilities for you, your family and entourage to reside in India.

The people of India who hold you in great veneration will no doubt accord

their traditional respect to your person.

Kind regards.8

7 Telegram to the Dalai Lama, sent through K. L. Mehta, Adviser to the Government of

Assam, 3 April 1959

8 After the message to the Dalai Lama, the following instructions were issued by S. Dutt to

K.L. Mehta, as part of the same telegram:

"2. In transmitting the message, the officer concerned should also inform the Dalai Lama

and his principal advisers that the Government of India are making the necessary

arrangements for the Party's travel in India.

3. If the Dalai Lama wishes to halt at Bomdila or Tezpur for rest you should fall in with his

wishes. We are sending P.N. Menon, formerly our Consul-General in Lhasa up to Bomdila

within the next day or two. He will be in charge of the party during: their travel to

destination in India. We have not yet decided where the Dalai Lama should reside but

obviously Shillong, Kalimpong or Darjeeling is out of the question. We shall send you a

further message about this at the earliest possible.

4. We hope you have made the necessary security arrangements. We propose sending a

senior IB Officer from here. We shall also send one or two interpreters. Please let-us know

if you want any other staff, which should be kept to the minimum.

***

To Subimal Dutt: Tibetan Refugees, Heinrich Harrer9

Telegram from Shri Chagla,10 Washington

2. I do not think that this proposal to start a big fund for the relief of

refugees from Tibet is a desirable one. People abroad and specially in

America seem to be obsessed with Hungary and what happened then. You

must have seen the telegram I received from Norman Thomas.11

3. I do not think there is likely to be any large number of refugees, and to

start big funds, at any rate at this stage, has no meaning. It will have a bad

political effect. If necessity arises later, the funds can perhaps be started.

5. No person, whether Indian or foreigner, should be given Inner Line permit to meet the

Dalai Lama and his party. When the Dalai Lama reaches Assam, we cannot altogether

prevent press correspondents from approaching him. P.N. Menon will be instructed how

best to deal with them.

6. We are instructing P.N. Menon to inform the Dalai Lama orally that it would be best for

him not to issue any long statements to the press here at this stage. The Dalai Lama will

undoubtedly appreciate the inadvisability of saying anything which would cause

embarrassment to him and to us. Similar advice will also be given to members of his party.

Since no press correspondent can meet the Dalai Lama until he comes out of the NEFA

area, it is not necessary to convey this advice immediately, even if it were possible to do

so. We should like all our officers who will be with the Dalai Lama and his party to observe

the utmost discretion in what they do or say to others.

7. [T.S.] Murti who is now in the Party should be with them until they reach their final

destination in India. Instruct him accordingly."

9 Note to the FS, 4 April 1959

10 M.C. Chagla, India's Ambassador to the USA

11 American socialist leader

4. Norman Thomas imagines that large numbers of Tibetan refugees can be

sent to other countries for rehabilitation. Tibetans will hardly fit in in any

country.

5. If you agree with this, we shall draft a telegram tomorrow to Shri

Chagla.

Telegram from Hicomind, London about Heinrich Harrer12

2. Any interview by Harrer with the Dalai Lama will be world news, and is

bound to be embarrassing both to the Dalai Lama and to us. I do not think

we should encourage this. We do not know what the immediate future may

bring, and whether the Dalai Lama himself would be agreeable or not. At

any rate, we are likely to advice him not to give interviews.

***

To M.C. Chagla: Fund for Tibetan Refugees13

Your telegram 157 April 3.

It seems to me premature to start a fund for relief of refugees from Tibet.

Thus far there has been no such movement of refugees except for party

accompanying Dalai Lama who will be looked after by the Government of

India. It appears that people are being influenced by example of Hungary

although conditions in Tibet and India are completely different, and I doubt

very much about any large influx of refugees into India. I would not like to

encourage this either on a large scale. Tibetans do not easily fit in any

foreign country. Even in India only the hill areas are suitable. Other

12 Heinrich Harrer (1912-2006); Austrian mountaineer, sportsman, geographer; lived in

Tibet, 1946-52; author of Seven Years in Tibet (London: Rupert Hart-Davis, 1953).

13 Telegram, 5 April 1959

countries would not suit them at all, and I am sure they will not be

accepted there. If a situation arises later demanding necessity of fund we

can consider it then. For the moment situation is fluid and uncertain. Dalai

Lama, will probably take another two weeks or more before he comes out

of NEFA. Discussions with him might help us to understand situation a little

better.

2. Norman Thomas has also sent me message about helping large number

of Tibetan refugees.

3. While therefore we appreciate sentiments which have led to proposal for

a fund, we feel that at this moment it is neither needed nor a desirable

move. You can explain position privately and suitably to sponsors of

proposal. Recent events in Tibet have deeply stirred feelings in India, and I

have explained our views and position in some detail at a press conference

held this morning.

***

To Harold Macmillan: Explaining Tibet Events14

Thank you for your personal message which has been communicated to me

through your High Commissioner in New Delhi.15 As I am leaving Delhi for

some days, I am sending you a reply immediately;

We are naturally much concerned at the developments in Tibet. You must

have learnt that the Dalai Lama has sought political asylum in India and we

have granted it. He has come over with members of his family and a party

14 Message sent through the Indian High Commissioner, Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit, 6 April

1959

15 Malcolm Macdonald

of about eighty persons. He is still in the remote areas of our North East

Frontier Agency. It will take him about two weeks to reach the railhead.

After that we propose to invite him to stay at one of our hill stations in

Northern India.

I do not think it is correct to compare Tibet with Hungary. Hungary was in

international law an independent state; Tibet has been recognised to be a

part of the Chinese State though it was to enjoy autonomy in regard to its

internal affairs.

I also do not think that the Soviet Government have had anything to do

with those developments in Tibet. The Chinese Government promised the

Tibetan, authorities not to interfere in their internal affairs. It is largely true

that they did not interfere in the social or religious customs, but they kept a

firm military grip and sometimes punished people who, they thought, were

against them.

Three years ago, a revolt started in the Kham area which, though Tibetan in

origin, has been ostensibly part of China proper for over forty years. The

Khampas are a hardy and turbulent people who have hardly ever submitted

to any firm governmental control from above. When the Chinese

Government tried to introduce their new measures of land reform in the

Kham area (which was not considered by them Tibet), there was a revolt

there. There was a good deal of killing on both sides to begin with. Since

then this revolt has continued in a guerilla form and has spread to East and

South East Tibet. The Chinese have found it difficult to deal with it. They

have repeatedly asked the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan authorities to

suppress it. These authorities had neither the capacity nor the desire to

fight against the Khampas. Indeed they must have sympathised with them

secretly. Because of this revolt, there has been a continuing ferment in

Tibet and the pressure of the Chinese Government on the Dalai Lama had

been increasing.

Apparently matters came to a crisis about the 10th of March, when the

Dalai Lama was invited by the Chinese Commander at Lhasa to visit him

and was asked not to bring his retinue. This alarmed the people of Lhasa as

they thought that this was a preliminary to the Dalai Lama being forcibly

removed from them and perhaps taken to China. Large crowds collected

around his palace begging him not to accept the invitation. For several days

afterwards there were people's demonstrations in Lhasa and all kinds of

meetings were held of the leading personalities there. There was much talk

of declaring independence and if necessary fighting the Chinese. The

Chinese authorities did not take any step against this for several days.

Either this took them by surprise or they were not prepared for it and were

waiting for reinforcements. Events were obviously heading towards conflict.

Apparently the Dalai Lama secretly left Lhasa on the night of the 17th. Two

or three days later fighting began. It is difficult to say how this started.

Inevitably the small ill-equipped Tibetan army could not hold out against

Chinese soldiery. After some shelling of important buildings in Lhasa, the

Tibetan army surrendered. We do not quite know what the damage has

been, but it must be fairly considerable.

Since then Lhasa has been relatively quiet, but the Khampa people appear

to be still in some kind of control of areas in the South and South East of

Tibet. Such brief reports as we have had from our representatives at Lhasa

and two other posts in Tibet indicate that the Chinese authorities have

come down with a heavy hand in various towns and probably elsewhere

also.

I rather doubt if the Chinese wanted to take the initiative in bringing about

this crisis, but their broad policies and the gradual development of the

situation made a conflict inevitable and now the Tibetans must be suffering

greatly. Even though the Chinese are strong in a military sense, it is no

easy task for them to deal with guerillas in the high mountainous areas.

There has been much talk in foreign countries of the possibility of large

numbers of Tibetans migrating to India. I rather doubt if this will happen

though individuals may endeavour to come across. I have been informed

that some attempts are being made in the United States to collect funds for

Tibetan refugees. As expressions of human sympathy they are

understandable, but in so far as they might serve to encourage Tibetans to

leave their country, I do not think that they would be helpful in the present

context.

It is difficult to forecast the future. We are, therefore, closely watching

events. Yesterday I gave a long Press Conference on this subject.39 ln this

I tried to express our views in restrained but clear language.

With kind regards,

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

To the Lok Sabha Secretariat: Chinese Restrictions on Indian

Mission16

I regret I am unable to accept this Short Notice Question. For the

information of Mr. Speaker, I might say that we are not aware that the

Chinese Government have disputed the objectivity of our Consul-General at

Lhasa.17 Also, that while there were certain restrictions placed on our

Mission at Lhasa, we cannot say how far they were necessary. This would

depend on the nature of the disturbances.

***

16 Note on a short notice question, 8 Apri11959

17 S.L. Chibber

To the Maharaja of Sikkim: Tibet a Sensitive Matter18

April 8, 1959

My dear Maharaja Sahib,

I received your letter of March 24 some days ago from our Political Officer

in Sikkim.19 We can well appreciate your concern and that of the people of

Sikkim about the current events in Tibet. I have made a number of

statements on the subject in our Parliament during the last two weeks. I

also dealt with it in a Press Conference on the 5th April. We are all thankful

that His Holiness the Dalai Lama has safely reached our territory. As I have

said before, we shall treat him with the respect and regard due to his

position as the spiritual leader of a large number of persons not only in his

country but in India. We have not yet been able to ascertain what his

wishes are, but it is our intention to arrange for him to stay in one of our

hill stations in North India. You can rest assured that we shall look after

him well.

As regards the happenings in Tibet, our position is a difficult and delicate

one. Any direct intervention by us would be resented by the Chinese and

would not do the Tibetans any good. Feelings are apparently running high

on both sides and I do not therefore wish to make a direct approach to

Premier Chou En-lai even informally at this stage. Such an approach would

not produce any results. However, you can rest assured that the interests

of the Tibetans are very much in my mind, although what we can do is not

yet clear to me.

Yours sincerely,

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

18 Letter to Tashi Namgyal, the Maharaja

19 Apa B.Pant

To C. Rajagopalachari: Khampa Revolt20

8th April, 1959

My dear Rajaji,

On return to Delhi from Allahabad this morning I have received your letter

of the 6th April. I have read the letter from Marco Pallis21 and I am

returning it.

The situation in Tibet is, of course, a difficult one and an embarrassing one

for us. We want to maintain good relations with China and at the same

time-we should like Tibet to enjoy real autonomy. It was inevitable that

social and economic changes should come to Tibet when its isolation was

broken down. We hoped that these changes would come through Tibetan

agencies, and perhaps gradually, and not be imposed by the Chinese

authorities. I think that the Chinese Government themselves appreciated

this position to some extent and therefore postponed all their proposed

reforms. But the inherent contradictions in Tibet during the last few years

almost made some kind of a conflict inevitable.

This conflict began in the Kham area which, strictly speaking, has not been

part of Tibet for the last half century or more, though it is essentially

Tibetan in character. This Kham area, being considered a part of China by

the Chinese authorities, was not governed by the assurances given by

China to the Tibetan authorities. The so-called reforms were imposed upon

the Kham people. These people have hardly ever submitted to any

20 Letter

21 (1895-1989); British composer, explorer, translator and scholar of Tibetan Buddhism;

fought in the First World War; went on climbing expeditions to Tibet, 1923, 1933, 1936,

1947; embraced Buddhism, 1936; lived in Kalimpong, 1947-52; returned to England, and

through his writings, helped raise public awareness about Tibet; author of Peaks and

Lamas (London: Cassell, 1939), The Way of the Mountain (Bloomington, Indiana: World

Wisdom Inc, 1960), A Buddhism Spectrum (Bloomington, Indiana: World Wisdom Inc.,

1980).

government. They are a tough fighting people who have owed only vague

allegiance to a suzerain power whether this was Tibet or China. When the

Chinese Government imposed its so-called reforms in this area, there was a

rebellion. This revolt has been continuing for over three years now and has

taken the form of guerilla activity. The mere fact that the Chinese

authorities, who are not averse to taking the strongest measures, have

failed to suppress this revolt during these three years indicates the

toughness of the Khampa people.

The continuance of this Khampa revolt was naturally followed with the

keenest interest and sympathy by the Tibetans, although the latter kept

aloof from it. Lately, the Khampa groups spread out right up to Lhasa.

Partly because of this and partly because the Chinese Government did not

wish to relax. its hold in any way over Tibet, many political measures were

taken which bore down heavily on the Tibetans. While actual social and

economic reforms were not introduced, politically if any person offended the

Chinese, he had to suffer for it immediately.

All this has led to this conflict. There can be little doubt that the vast

majority of Tibetans have a strong sense of independence and do not like

Chinese or any other control. If they had real autonomy, possibly matters

might have adjusted themselves.

You will have followed the various statements made on behalf of

Government in regard to this matter. We have tried to adopt a balanced

attitude which means that we have expressed our broad sympathy for the

Tibetans and at the same time laid stress on our relations with China.

Vaguely we have said that we hope Tibet would enjoy autonomy within the

Chinese State.

The Indian public opinion has expressed itself much more strongly and the

mere fact that we have given asylum to the Dalai Lama, though completely

correct, is not going to be liked by the Chinese. I do not quite see what

more we can do. The real difficulty is that many people who talk loudly

about Tibet today are not really interested in the people of Tibet, but are

exploiting it in terms of the cold war. On the other hand, during the last

year or so the Chinese Government has become progressively more rigid

and there has been even a touch of arrogance in their dealings with other

countries.

The only possible way for us to be helpful in this situation is to continue to

have some kind of a balanced outlook. The moment we leave that, nothing

more can be done by us. I know that even otherwise we cannot do much.

Yours affectionately,

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

To CPP: Tibetan Refugees22

NO GENERAL ASYLUM TO EMIGRES FROM TIBET: NEHRU

New Delhi, April 9 - Prime Minister Nehru is understood to have said at a

meeting of the Congress Parliamentary Party here today that, while firmly

upholding the principle of Tibetan autonomy, India would endeavour to

maintain friendly relations with China.

He categorically declared that he did not want to leave any heritage of

unfriendliness with China or any other neighbouring country lest posterity

should think that at a rather critical time some action had been taken to

impair the Sino-Indian friendship which had existed for several centuries.

Pandit Nehru said that in deciding upon her attitude towards the Tibetan

issue India had to be guided by Gandhiji's principles of universal friendship

and refusal to compromise on principles.

22 Report of speech, New Delhi, 9 April 1959. From the National Herald, 10 April 1959

The policy of India like most other countries, he said, was guided by the

principles of protecting her frontiers and endeavouring to maintain

friendship with neighouring countries. India would be firm and not submit

on wrong principles.

Pandit Nehru deplored the use of "cold war language" in certain quarters in

relation to the Tibetan developments. Both Communists and anti-

Communists were, using strong language. This, he said, would not clear the

way for negotiations even if there was a will to negotiate.

In an analysis of the recent developments he was understood to have said

that the Tibetan trouble started in the Khampa area (Inner Tibet), an area

not covered by the autonomy agreement, when the Chinese introduced

certain land reforms and the like. Some of the Khampas who opposed the

Chinese methods fled to Tibet and the anti-Chinese feelings created by

them in course of time reached Lhasa. This "clash of wills" of "two

extremes" had been there for some time and he had "sensed" it while in

Bhutan recently.

In this atmosphere when the Dalai Lama was invited by the Chinese

Commander people got an impression that the Chinese might take him to

Peking, and there was a very big demonstration. The demonstration, he is

understood to have said, was in the nature of an expression of the "national

feelings and sentiments" of the Tibetans.

Pandit Nehru rejected the suggestion that India should open her doors to ail

those Tibetans who might like to seek refuge in India.

The grant of asylum on such a large scale would not be in the interests of

the Tibetans who stayed back in Tibet, he is understood to have stated.

In a long speech, Pandit Nehru justified the granting of asylum to the Dalai

Lama and a few others on the ground that it was permitted under

international law.

Pandit Nehru said that, if everyone coming to India from Tibet was

admitted, it might lead to a situation in which the Tibetans remaining in

their country would be bereft of leadership. He cited the case of East

Pakistan wherefrom the leadership had come back to India to the

disadvantage of the non-Muslim population in that country.

So, Pandit Nehru added, those who were asking India to open the doors to

Tibetan émigrés were doing a disservice to the Tibetans.

In a passing reference to Pakistan in this context he was reported to have

remarked that the relations between India and Pakistan had not been

happy. It was so in spite of India's continued efforts to maintain friendly

relations with that country.

***

To P.N. Rajabhoj: Meeting the Dalai Lama23

My dear Rajabhoj,

Your letter of the 7th April. I cannot suggest at this stage how you can

contact the Dalai Lama because his programme itself is uncertain. I

suppose you will have later opportunities to meet him.

Yours sincerely,

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

To the Parliamentary Consultative Committee on Foreign Affairs:

Tibet and Algeria24

23 Letter to Rajabhoj, Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from Bombay. J. N. Supplementary

Papers, NMML.

24 PTI report of speech, 10 April 1959. From the National Herald, 12 April 1959.

TIBET: NEHRU URGES NEED FOR AVOIDING COLD WAR ATMOSPHERE

April 10, 1959

New Delhi, April 11 - Prime Minister Nehru has stressed the vital need of

avoiding the cold war atmosphere coming to India in the wake of

happenings in Tibet.

Addressing the parliamentary consultative committee on foreign affairs on

Friday, the Prime Minister is understood to have expressed his keen desire

to maintain friendly relations with China.

He did not want that any trail of bitterness should be left behind in India on

this matter.

The Prime Minister is reported to have expressed his anxiety on this issue

and said that Sino-Indian relations should not be allowed to be embittered.

Asked if the Chinese People's Government had sent any "reaction" to the

concern expressed by the people here about the situation in Tibet, Pandit

Nehru is understood to have said that there had been no communication

from Peking on this matter even at the diplomatic level. Pandit Nehru

reiterated the view that India could not follow an "open door policy" to

admit every refugee that came from Tibet.

He is reported to have told the consultative committee that since March I

last only seven refugees from Tibet had come to India apart from the party

of eighty that came with the Dalai Lama. There was no large-scale

movement of refugees. Any great influx of refugees would not be in the

interest of the Tibetans themselves as it would deprive them of proper

leadership.

He is understood to have reiterated the view that the basis of the uprising

in Tibet was deeply rooted in a "national feeling."

Asked about the future abode of the Dalai Lama, Pandit Nehru is reported

to have said that a semi-permanent abode was being selected at some hill

station.

In reply to a question, Pandit Nehru is reported to have said that among

the hill stations being considered for the Dalai Lama's stay were Mussoorie

and Simla.

Asked whether a second Bandung Conference was likely to be called to iron

out the differences among Afro-Asian nations on various international

issues, Pandit Nehru is understood to have said that at the present moment

it would require a very great effort to find a "common ground" for

discussion of problems.

When a member suggested that the Chine se Government might consider

the Dalai Lama's escape as "good riddance", Pandit Nehru is reported to

have said that this was not correct. The Chinese authorities would have

liked to prevent the Dalai Lama's escape, but they failed to do so.

Asked whether India would accord recognition to the Algerian provisional

Government, Pandit Nehru is understood to have said that merely according

recognition would not help solve the problem.

He added that during the last four years, nearly one tenth of the Algerian

population had been killed in the fighting going on there. This was-a great

tragedy.

Asked whether India would allow medical supplies to be sent to Aigeria,

Pandit Nehru is reported to have said that this proposaI would be

considered.

***

To M.C. Chagla: Tolstoy Foundation Help for Tibetan Refugees25

Prime Minister has received a telegram from Mrs. Alexandra Tolstoy, Count

Tolstoy's daughter,26 datelined New York. Please communicate a reply to

her on the following lines:

25 Note to SG and FS for Dutt to forward to Chagla, 10 April 1959.

Prime Minister thanks her for her telegram and appreciates the offer by the

Tolstoy Foundation 'of help for Tibetan refugees. Thus far however no

problem of refugees has arisen. Apart from the Dalai Lama and his party of

about 80 very few persons have come over to India. The Government of

India have made themselves responsible for the Dalai Lama's party. If any

problem of refugee arises, we shall gladly communicate with her again if

necessary. The Dalai Lama is still in a remote part of North-East India and

it will be another two weeks or so before he reaches the place which has

been selected by us for his residence in India. It is then only that we can

consult him about his own wishes in the matter. For the present, therefore,

we think that it is not necessary for Count Tolstoy's grandson or anyone

else to come to India to meet the Dalai Lama.

***

To Amrit Kaur: Tibetan Refugees27

April 11, 1959

My dear Amrit,

Your letter of April 4 (why it has reached me today I do not know, unless

you have given a wrong date to it).

No question of giving relief to refugees from Tibet has yet arisen. The only

refugees thus far are 7, apart from the Dalai Lama's party of 80, which is

the responsibility of the Government of India.

26 (1884-1979); literary secretary to her father Leo Tolstoy; keeper of Tolstoy archives and

estate; looked after the wounded soldiers in the First World War; arrested five times after

the Russian Revolution; migrated to USA, 1929; founded Tolstoy Foundation, 1939 with

President Herbert Hoover as Chairman (1939-64); worked for resettlement of refugees.

27 Letter to Amrit Kaur, Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from Punjab, and Former Union Minister

of Health.

I rather doubt if many refugees will come over; a few might. People are apt

to compare Tibet with Hungary, but the conditions are entirely different.

Tibet is a very sparsely populated country and it is not easy to move about

from one place to another. No doubt such movements now are not

encouraged by the Chinese authorities, and the few passes to India will

probably be guarded by them.

Thus I do not think that many people will come here. The few who might

try to come will find no great difficulty from our side.

If help is needed, the Red Cross can certainly give it. As a matter of fact,

we have had offers from organisations in other countries. I understand that

a relief committee is likely to be started in Delhi also consisting of people

from various Parties.

Yours, Jawaharlal

***

To U.N. Dhebar: Tibetan Refugees28

April 11, 1959

My dear Dhebarbhai,

Your letter of the 10th April about the proposal to start a relief committee

for Tibet refugees. I discussed this matter with Suchetaji29 today. I told her

that I saw no objection to a relief committee being formed. Indeed, I

thought it desirable to have such a Committee to which people from

different Parties can be invited. I would suggest, however, that it should

not be too big a committee, and it should mainly be a Delhi committee, so

that the people could meet whenever necessary.

28 Letter to Dhebar, former Congress President. U. N. Dhebar Papers, NMML. Also available

in AICC Papers, NMML and JN Collection.

29 Sucheta Kiipalani

I do not myself think that any problem of a large number of refugees from

Tibet is likely to arise. People have got into the habit of thinking of

Hungary, but conditions were very different there. Tibet is a sparsely

populated country and movements are difficult. The few passes into India

are probably guarded by Chinese troops. So, quite apart from what we may

or & may not do to incomers, there would not be many who can come.

Nevertheless, I think it is a good gesture to have such a committee.

Yours sincerely,

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

To S. Dutt: Dalai Lama's Residence30

I have read all these papers.

2. From the list of persons accompanying the Dalai Lama, if appears that

the number is 120 and not 80 as we imagined. On a different paper,

mention is made of the persons who are expected to accompany the Dalai

Lama further, that is, to his ultimate place of residence. This is a much

smaller list. It is suggested that the others accompanying him might go to

Darjeeling and Kalimpong. Among these others who are supposed to go to

Darjeeling or Kalimpong, are the members of bis family, the tutors and

other officials. I think that it would not be desirable for the members of his

family or the Ministers and other high officials to be separated from him. All

the important people accompanying him plus the necessary attendants,

should come together to Mussoorie. If we allow the important people to

establish themselves in Kalimpong or Darjeeling, difficulties would arise.

This need not apply to the unimportant people or to the host of attendants.

30 Note to FS, 12 April 1959. S. Dutt Papers, NMML. Also available in JN Collection

Some indication of our views might, therefore, be sent to P.N. Menon31 and

K.L. Mehta.32 The Dalai Lama might be informed that we are arranging

suitable accommodation for a fairly large party and that it would be

desirable for his principal advisers as well as the members of his family to

be with him. Possibly he is afraid of the members of his family being

brought to the plains in the hot weather. He should be told that this will not

be so and that they will be kept at a bill station.

3. The Dalai Lama should be informed that we are making arrangements at

Mussoorie which is a bill station and which is fairly easily accessible from

Delhi.33

4. He should be informed also that I hope to meet him at Mussoorie soon

after his arrival there and to discuss various points with him.

5. If they wish to bring some interpreters from Kalimpong, they can do so.

6. The Dalai Lama can be told that any particular persons who are indicated

by him, will certainly be allowed entry into India. We may also permit entry

to some unarmed Tibetans seeking asylum, but if the numbers are at aIl

large, the matter will have to be given special consideration.

7. I presume that the Dalai Lama has been informed that we shall give

every facility to his brother, Gyalo Dhondup,34 and anyone else he wishes,

to meet him, but this will be much more convenient at Mussoorie than en

route.

31 Consul-General of India in Lhasa, 1954-1956; Director, External Publicity, at this time;

met the Dalai Lama at Bomdila on 12 April as the GOI's representative.

32 Adviser to the Governor of Assam for NEFA. 57.

33 Nehru had earlier written to Ila Palchoudhuri on 4 April 1959: "We cannot possibly keep

the Dalai Lama near the frontier. Therefore, Darjeeling, Kalimpong, Siliguri, etc., are ruled

out."

34 Gyalo Thondup (h. 1928); eider brother of the 14th Dalai Lama.

8. The other points raised by the Ministers will have to be dealt with after

the arrival of the Dalai Lama in Mussoorie and when we have had talks with

him.

9. I agree with you that some kind of a statement should be issued by the

Dalai Lama when he emerges from the NEFA. The proposed communiqué is

not suitable for this purpose. At the same time, the statement he might

issue at Tezpur should not be too bad. It should deal with the

circumstances of his leaving Lhasa, but something more is needed.

Perhaps, you might come to see me tomorrow evening and we can discuss

this matter further.

10. There is no mention in these papers of the alleged letters he is

supposed to have written to the Chinese Commander in Lhasa, This

question is agitating all the foreign as well as Indian correspondents, and

some time or other he will have to say something about them. You might

indicate to P.N. Menon to find out privately about this matter.

11. The latest message that he has sent me, should be suitably

acknowledged.

12. I think that you should accompany me when I go to Mussoorie or,

perhaps, you might even go a day before, I intend going to Dehra Dun on

the 23rd evening and spending the night there. Early on the 24th morning,

I shall go to Mussoorie. I shall be busy with my conference till lunch time

and indeed a little after. I can, therefore, see the Dalai Lama on the 24th

afternoon. I have some engagements then, but they can be adjusted. I

intend returning to Dehra Dun on the 24th evening and coming back to

Delhi on the 25th morning.

13. If you accompany me on the 23rd, you can go on straight to Mussoorie

that evening and not remain at Dehra Dun, or you could go early in the

morning on the 24th from Dehra Dun and see the Dalai Lama and others

there on the morning of the 25th.

***

To the Lok Sabha Secretariat: Violation of Air Space35

The following note should be sent to the Lok Sabha Secretariat for

submission to Mr. Speaker:

"I have enquired into this matter. The press report appearing in the Indian

Express of the 9th April appears to be very largely incorrect. The facts, as

we know them, are that many of the planes which were found to have flown

over Sikkim, Bhutan or Indian territory were our own aircraft carrying out

Survey of India duties or other work assigned to them. Some of these

aircraft were Soviet planes on the regular scheduled flights between

Moscow and New Delhi. On two occasions they were Soviet planes bringing

the King of Nepal and his party.

On two occasions, they were Chine se planes doing survey work on the

border between China and Burma, and they might have accidentally partly

overflown our territory. In a number of cases, the planes have not been

identified and they might have been Chinese planes. Whether these planes

came over accidentally or not it is difficult to say.

There has been no report of violations of our air space in March or April

1959. Therefore, no question has arisen, insofar as we are aware, of any

Chinese aircraft pursuing the Dalai Lama over our territory.

Steps for the security of our frontier have been taken. It is not possible to

have air bases in the mountainous regions near the border as the terrain is

not suitable for aircraft to land or take off. Even supplies have to be sent by

airdropping in these areas.

Because of these facts, it is submitted to Mr. Speaker that a statement on

this subject will not be desirable."

35 Note, 12 April 1959

***

To the Dalai Lama: Advice on Meeting the Press36

I thank Your Holiness for the message which you have sent me through our

Political Officer, Shri Harminder Singh. I am myself anxious to meet you at

the earliest opportunity. As you must have been informed, we are

arranging for Your Holiness and the members of your family and your

entourage to stay at Mussoorie. Delhi is getting warm now and Your

Holiness need not take the trouble of coming here to meet me. ln

accordance with an earlier engagement, I am due to visit Mussoorie on the

24th and I propose to call on you the same afternoon.

2. I have seen the report of the talk which you had with our Political Officer

on the 6th April. There are a number of matters which you and I might

discuss personally and I am, therefore, not giving you a detailed reply at

this stage.

3. We have certainly no objection to your brother, Gyalo Dhondup, meeting

you, and we are arranging facilities for him to do so as early as possible. He

cao travel back with you to Mussoorie, if you so wish. I understand that

some other important Tibetan personalities, who have been residing in

India for some time, are also anxious to meet you. We feel these persons

should not trouble you en route, but we shall certainly afford them facilities

to call on you later in Mussoorie.

4. May I draw Your Holiness's attention to one particular matter. I am

informed that a large number of press correspondents: from all over the

world are now gathered in Tezpur and its vicinity awaiting Your Holiness's

arrival. It would be difficult for you to avoid saying something to them, and

I am inclined to the view that Your Holiness might release a brief statement

36 Telegram to the Dalai Lama, sent through P. N. Menon, 13 April 1959.

to these correspondents.37 Perhaps, you might defer a detailed statement

on the political situation in Tibet and your future intentions until you have

settled down in Mussoorie and have had time to reflect on the recent

developments in your country.

5. We are making arrangements at Tezpur so that you might give darshan

and blessings to people gathered there and also to allow pressmen to take

photographs before you leave.

6. May I also suggest that in order to prevent embarrassment to you or

distorted versions being published, it would be best if members of your

party desisted from seeing the press correspondents individually and

making statements to them.

7. I am looking forward to meeting Your Holiness,

With kind regard,

***

To Sampurnanand: The Dalai Lama's Accommodation at Mussoorie38

April 13, 1959

My dear Sampurnanand,

I am sorry for the delay in acknowledging two of your letters dated March

29 and 30.

So far as Tibet is concerned, much has happened since you wrote, and I

have also spoken on that subject on several occasions. Naturally, we have a

great deal of sympathy for the Tibetans and we should express it and have

37 According to a report in The Hindu on 13 April, S. Sen, Joint Secretary, MEA, had been

deputed to assist journalists assembled there to cover the arrival of the Dalai Lama. Over

75 pressmen, mostly from foreign countries, had gathered in Tezpur. The Dalai Lama

issued a statement on 18 April 1959 at Tezpur, before leaving for Mussoorie, recounting

the circumstances in which he left Tibet.

38 Letter to the Chief Minister of UP

expressed it. The fact remains that the situation is a very difficult one and a

wrong step by us will injure the Tibetans apart from other consequences.

So far as the Americans are concerned, I am sure that most of them do not

care for Tibet or for the Tibetans at all. They are only interested in using

them for cold war purposes.

We have announced today that the Dalai Lama will be staying at Mussoorie.

He will probably reach there on the 21st April. We are sending one of our

Foreign Office officers, Jagat Mehta,39 to help the local officials in regard to

the arrangements for the stay. At your Government's suggestion, we have

agreed to Birla House, etc. being reserved for this purpose.

I shall be going to Dehra Dun on the 23rd evening and shall go to

Mussoorie the next morning. I have a conference, etc., to attend to in the

morning. In the afternoon, I shall visit the Dalai Lama. That evening I shall

return to Dehra Dun where I shall spend the night. The next day, 25th, I

shall return to Delhi.

Yours sincerely, Jawaharlal Nehru

***

To Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit: On Western Press Reports40

Madurai, South India,

15th April, 1959

[My dear High Commissioner],

I have received your letter of April 941 here at Madurai in South India, I am

replying briefly now.

39 Deputy Secretary, MEA, 1956-1960.

40 Letter

41 See Appendix 11, pp. 587-589

So far as Tibet is concerned, I have made various statements and I shall no

doubt refer to the subject again when the time comes. We have done more

for the Dalai Lama and the people of Tibet generally than any Western

power has done or is likely to do, except, of course, for strong

denunciations of China's conduct. We do not propose to be hustled by

British or American press comments. I shall probably be meeting the Dalai

Lama at Mussoorie in about ten days' time. The article by Kingsley Martin in

the New Statesman42 was on the whole a sensible article.

People used to cold war do not seem to realise that our approach to

questions is different and that it does little good to shout loudly and

denounce and condemn. We expressed sympathies with the grieved party

which normally indicates our own thinking. To den ounce and condemn is to

use the methods of the cold war. There has been enough to condemn in

Algeria and in Nyasaland, We have exercised restraint there.

Richardson's43 article in the Observer is a foolish one. He ought to have

known better even as regards the facts. It is well known that the

Kuomintang Government and Chiang Kai-shek as well as the earlier

Governments in China never renounced their claim to Tibet. In fact there

was some trouble with the Kuomintang Government in 1946 over this

42 Of 9 April. The Hindu of II April published the following excerpt of that article with the

heading "Nehru's Cautious Policy. Kingsley Martin's Tribune". Datelined London, April 9, it

continued: "Mc. Martin, Editor of the British left-wing weekly, New Statesman, today

commended the caution of Mc. Nehru, India's Prime Minister, in the 'new and dangerous

chapter in Asian history' opened by the 'Tibetan revolt and its suppression by Peking'

43 Hugh E. Richardson (1905-2000); joined ICS, 1930, served in Bengal, in Baluchistan,

1934-36, in Tibet, 1936-40 and 1946-50, in India, Pakistan and China, retired in 1950;

wrote books, articles, papers, and delivered lectures in universities on Tibetan history,

language and culture; one of the founder-trustees of the Institute of Tibetan Studies,

Tring; founded with others the Tibet Society of the UK and remained an advocate for

Tibetan independence until his death.

matter.44 It is true that the Chinese Government was too weak to interfere.

When it became strong, it interfered. Even then we wrote to them stressing

the autonomy of Tibet. At first they sent a rather rude reply. There was

nothing that we or any other Government could possibly do later except to

break relations with China and sit tight. The agreement we made with

China in 1954 was strictly about our own matters in connection with Tibet.

It is manifestly impossible for us to keep bits of our army there.

It should also be remembered that for three years or more, there has been

a rebellion in the Kham area which is largely Chinese (not Tibetan); that

this rebellion spread to parts of Tibet proper; that the Tibetan authorities

practically joined the Khampa people and declared independence. I should

very much like to know what, in the circumstances, England or America or

any other power would have done.

The Chinese always and, more especially, now are given to arrogance and

throwing their weight about, I have no doubt that they have treated the

Tibetans very harshly, though I imagine that some of the reports are rather

exaggerated. Anyhow, I just do not see what India could have done more

than she has except, of course, for condemnation and denunciation.

I wanted to write more but it is just not possible from here.

[Yours sincerely]

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

In the Rajya Sabha: The Dalai Lama45

Dalai Lama's Stay in India 44 In fact, in 1947 in connection with the Asian Relations Conference, see SWJN/SS/2Ip.

502 and SWJN/SS/1/p. 525 for Tibetan Government's congratulations to Nehru on the

formation of the Interim Government in 1946

45 Reply to questions, 20 April 1959. Rajya Sabha Debates, Vol. XXV, cols 49-51.

Shri V. K. Dhage:46 Will the Prime Minister be pleased to state where the

Dalai Lama will stay in India?

The Deputy Minister of External Affairs (Shrimati Lakshmi Menon):

Arrangements for the stay of Dalai Lama and party are being made in

Mussoorie.

Shri V. K. Dhage: May I know what privileges and facilities are afforded to

the Dalai Lama and his party, and for the Dalai Lama particularity?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I do not know what the hon. Member means by

'privileges'. Facilities are facilities. Arrangements have been made for his

comfortable stay having regards to security, etc.

Shri Rohit M. Dave:47 May I know if the attention of the Government of

India is drawn to the fact that in the statement issued on behalf of the Dalai

Lama from Tezpur, concern has been shown for ensuring perpetual security

of the sacred religion and freedom of his country, and if so, will the Dalai

Lama be given reasonable facilities to carry on his legitimate activities in

pursuance of this concern?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: If the hon. Member means if he will be given

freedom to carry on legitimate religious activities, certainly. If he refers to

political activities, political activities are not carried on from one country

with regard to another.

46 Independent, Rajya Sabha MP from Bombay State

47 PSP, Rajya Sabha Member from Bombay State.

Dr H. N. Kunzru:48 Is it a fact that in England which has freely granted

asylum to political refugees” the refugees have been carry on normal

political propaganda in favour of their views? Only they have not been

allowed to collect arms or to make warlike preparations against the country

to which they belong.

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: It is rather difficult to draw a line. Certainly to some

extent it is permitted and to some extent it may not be permitted. It is

difficult for me to lay down hard and fast rules.

Dr. H. N. Kunzru: Does the Government of India ask these people to refrain

from colleting arms for being sent to Tibet or doing any other thing which

will amount to a warlike act against China, or even prevent the Tibetan

refugees mm giving expression to their views with regard to the future of

Tibet or stating matters of fact when they feel that it is necessary to do so

to clear up imposition in Tibet?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: The hon. Member might have noticed that we have

given a fairly large measure of freedom of expression of views to the people

and Dalai Lama himself has made a statement as he felt like making it. We

have not come in the way of his statement. As for what we expect people

to do, that depends on many things. It is not a question of the Dalai Lama,

but all manner of other folk coming in. The Dalai Lama is a responsible man

and no doubt is acting in a responsible way. But there are so many others.

We do not quite know how they might function and not function. It is an

ordinary right in every country including England to limit the functioning of

foreigners who create difficulties with other countries. There is no rule of

law about it. The rule of law is that country - the host country - has the

48 Independent, Rajya Sabha MP from UP.

right to limit it. To what extent it does so and in what manner, is always a

matter of circumstances and the situation.

Dr. A. N. Bose:49 Is it proposed to extend diplomatic immunities and extra

territorial rights to the Dalai Lama and his party?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I do not understand his question. There is no such

thing as 'extra-territorial rights'.

Shri Santosh Kumar Basu:50 Should not the main consideration in these

matters be the external and internal security of our own country?

Mr. Chairman:51 That is accepted. What he says is, the main consideration

in these matters should be our security-external and internal. That is

accepted on all hands.

***

In the Rajya Sabha: Tibetan Refugees52

Tibetans Permitted to Enter India

Shri J. H. Joshi:53 Will the Prime Minister be pleased to state the total

number of Tibetans who have recently been given permission to enter India

and stay here?

49 PSP, Rajya Sabha MP from West Bengal

50 Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from West Bengal

51 S. Radhakrishnan

52 Reply to questions, 20 April 1959. Rajya Sabha Debales, Vol. XXV, cols 46-48

53 Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from Bombay State

The Deputy Minister of External Affairs (Shrimati Lakshmi Menon): Since

the 1st March 1959, the Dalai Lama with a party of 86 persons has entered

India.54 Apart from this party, 7 other Tibetans have also entered India.

[Translation begins:

Shri P.N. Rajabhoj:55 Could I know whether the Government gives them

some special facilities because the condition in Tibet is not normal?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: Whom?

Shri P.N. Rajabhoj : I wish to ask about the Tibetan people who have come

here. Is the Government providing them with some special facilities or not?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: Those who have come, have come. As far as Dalai

Lamaji's party is concerned, we have taken full responsibility for them.

They are travelling to Mussoorie at present. As for the remaining five or ten

people who have come, the question of rehabilitating them is not before us

that they should be given under the charge of the Rehabilitation Ministry.

Translation ends.]

Shri N. M. Lingam: May I enquire if the Government proposes to fix any

limit beyond which refugees will not be allowed to enter?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: Question of limit, Sir has not arisen. The questions

are based on the assumption that large numbers are trying to push in. Very

few, as I said-Only seven or eight-generally are trying to come in the whole

month.

The question does not arise yet. We examine each case as it is.

54 For other statements on the Dalai Lama's arrivai, see also items 107, 119, 120 and 122

55 Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from Bombay State

Pandit S.S.N. Tankha:56 The hon. Deputy Minister stated that permission

has been granted for 86 persons who are accompanying the Dalai Lama. Is

it not a fact that the Dalai Lama's party now consists of 120 persons and

they must all have been given permission?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: No Sir, so far as I know, it does not consist of 120

persons. The figure 120 was mentioned at one stage, but on further

enquiry and looking at the people, they are fewer.

Shri Gopikrishna Vijaivargiya:57 I want to know whether, along with the

Dalai Lama or independently, any of those who formed the Cabinet of the

Dalai Lama-previous to the Panchen Lama Cabinet-have come here?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I believe that there are two, three or four - I forgot

how many - of the previous ministers with him.

Shrimati T. Nallamuthu Ramamurthi:58 Should we not allow friends ofIndia

to come into our country? Are we to limit the frontiers in such a way that

intellectuals and friends would be barred from entering this country? What

international law is there to prevent such people from entering the country?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: Well, that is naturally expected, Sir.

Shri Jaswant Singh:59 But the normal papers had to be carried by parties

going from one country to another.

56 Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from UP

57 Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from MP

58 Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from Madras State

59 Independent, Rajya Sabha MP from Rajasthan

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: No restrictions. But the normal papers to be had to

be carried by parties going from one country to another.

Shri Jaswant Singh: Even now, those who carry the normal papers, would

they be allowed entry into our country?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I have no doubt-if the normal papers are carried,

they would. The question now arises about people who do not carry any

papers at all and even they in certain cases, are admitted.

Shri D. A. Mirza:60 May I know whether the Government of1ndia will give

protection to those Tibetans who want to take asylum in India?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: The hon. Members referred to what I have said on

previous occasions.

***

To B.P. Chaliha: Tibetan Refugees61

We have just received a report that a large number of refugees from Tibet,

possibly involving many hundreds, are likely to seek refuge in our territory

in the Kameng Frontier Division within the next day or two. ln the present

situation we shall have to admit them but we have issued strict instruction,

to the border check post to disarm the refugees. For security and other

reasons these refugees cannot be allowed to stay in the NEFA but will have

to be moved down to the plains with the minimum delay. The question

where they should be sent in future will be considered earliest possible.

Meantime we shall be grateful for the Assam Government's cooperation and

60 Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from Madras State

61 Telegram to the Chief Minister of Assam, 22 April 1959

assistance in making arrangements for the temporary accommodation of

the refugees. We are issuing instruction to the NEFA Administration and

asking the Adviser to contact your Chief Secretary.62 Detailed suggestions

are being separately communicated both to the Chief Secretary and to the

Adviser by the Foreign Secretary.

***

In the Lok Sabha: Chinese Maps63

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS Maps Published in China and Russia

Question:64 Will the Prime Minister be pleased to state:

(a) whether Government are aware of the fact that maps recently

published in China and Russia show large chunks of our territory as

part of their territories; and

(b) if so, the action taken by Government of India in the matter?

The Deputy Minister of External Affairs (Shrimati Lakshmi Menon): (a) and

(b). Yes, Sir; Instances of maps, published in China and Russia, depicting

certain parts of Indian territory as parts of China, have come to our notice.

The attention of these two Governments has already been drawn to the

discrepancies.

62 S.K. Dutta

63 Reply to questions, 22 April 1959. Lok Sabha Debates, Second Series, Vol. XXX, cols

12715-12721

64 By PSP MP Rajendra Singh, Jan Sangh MP P.R. Assar, and Congress MPs D.C. Sharma,

Iqbal Singh, P. C. Borooah, Nek Ram Negi.

Shri Rajendra Singh: The hon. Minister has said that the attention of the

concerned Governments has been drawn to this matter. May I know what

results have so far been achieved in this connection?

The Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs (Shri Jawaharlal Nehru):

So far as the Russian maps are concerned, I think they had merely taken

those maps or copied them from the Chinese maps without probably going

into the matter, and when we addressed them they said they would enquire

into this look into this.

So far as the Chinese maps are concerned, we are still in correspondence.

As I have previously informed the House, their answer has been that "these

are old maps and we are not sure of the exact border and we shall look into

it and that the status quo should continue." That is not a very adequate

answer, if I may say so, after so many years. We have pointed that out to

them. I wrote to them again on the subject about a month or so ago,

maybe a little more or a little less.65 We have not had any further reply

from them.

Shri Assar: May I know whether any other Communist countries of eastern

Europe have also published such a map?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: We have not got all the maps. I cannot answer.

They have not come to our notice. The Russian map was not published

separately. It was part of a big atlas map that came to our notice.

Shri Naushir Bharucha: Is the Prime Minister aware that after he gave this

House an explanation of the Chinese Government, recently new maps have

been printed in about October, 1958, which contain the same

encroachments as before?

65 See SWJN/SS/47/pp. 451-454

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I do not exactly know. I have not seen these new

maps, but it may very well be so. As I said, I am in correspondence with

the Chinese Government on the subject. If the hon. Member is referring to

what might be called newspaper maps or magazine maps

Shri Naushir Bharucha rose

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: What I mean is this. Inside a magazine, a page is

given broadly, or, it may be regular cartographical maps.

Shri Naushir Bharucha: The news which I had got from Kalimpong and

Gangtok when I was there was that fresh maps have been published after

the explanation of the hon. Prime Minister.

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I know that that has been going on. But what I was

saying was that these are types of maps which appear in packs of

magazines and others, not the regular atlas maps. But that would not make

any difference.

I merely wanted to know what type of maps he was referring to.

Shri Dasappa:66 May I know if during the Kuomintang regime it was found

that the Chinese maps drawn up then had included any part of our territory

which does not belong to China?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I suppose they did. I do not remember from

personal knowledge, because the present Chinese Government's answer

has always been that "we are reproducing the old maps".

66 H.C. Dassapa, Congress Lok Sabha MP from Bangalore, Mysore State

Shri D.C. Sharma: May I know if there is any dispute about any border

territory or any kind of territory between China and India and, if not, why is

it that some parts of India which are obviously in India have been shown as

parts of China?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: It is rather difficult for me to answer that question.

We have discussed one or two minor frontier disputes which comprise tiny

tracts of territory, maybe a mile this way or a mile that way, in the high

mountains where nobody lives and those are pending. We have discussed

them and for the present no settlement has been arrived at. So other

question has been raised for discussion; except that one sees this map, no

other question has been raised that way.

Shri Hem Barua: In view of the fact that these cartographical encroachment

on our territory persist and these are periodically reproduced in the

periodicals-People China, October, 1954 issue, and in China Pictorial, July

1958 issue-and every time the explanation that the Chinese Government is

giving to us is that this is the handiwork of the Chiang Kai shek regime,

may I know whether Government propose to demand a correction forthwith

of these incorrect maps and the same time demand the withdrawal of

incorrect maps from circulation?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: That is exactly what the Government has done and

the reply has been that while these maps may be incorrect largely but

exactly what should be correct is the thing we want to go into before we

change them. Therefore, let the status quo continue as it is. We cannot

correct an incorrect thing by another incorrect thing. I am putting the

arguments that they have put forward.

Shri C.D. Pande:67 Apart from the maps, because after all, the question of

the maps is academic, may I know whether there are certain portions of

land between India and Tibet where they are encroaching on the basis of

these maps -- encroaching into our territory,-particularly in Taklakot which

is near the border of Almora? At Taklakot they have come six miles this

way, according to their map. It is not a question of map alone. They have

actually encroached on our territory; six miles in one pass.

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I should like to give a precise answer to such

questions. I would not like to venture to give an imprecise answer. Taklakot

and another place – Hoti - have been places under argument68 and

sometimes, according to our reports we have received, some Chinese have

advanced a mile or two, maybe, in high mountains. It is true. We have

been enquiring into it. The difficulty is that in the winter months most of

these places are almost inaccessible and more inaccessible from our side

than from the other side.

Mr. Speaker: Next question.

Several Hon. Members rose

Shri Ranga:69 This is a very important question.

Mr. Speaker: Then shall I allow the whole of the Question Hour far this

question? I would suggest that hon. Members may have authentic copies of

these maps and others-whatever they are able to get-and if it is necessary

67 Congress, Lok Sabha MP from Naini Tal, UP (now Uttarakhand).

68 For Barahoti question, see also SWJN/SS/41/p. 673

69 Congress, Lok Sabha MP from Tenali, Andhra Pradesh

to have further elucidation, the hon. Prime Minister is willing to have a half-

an-hour discussion.

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: No, Sir. You will permit us to say, with all respect,

that I am not willing.

Mr. Speaker: Next question.

Several Hon. Members rose.

Mr. Speaker: There are 20 hon. Members getting up.

Shri Ranga: If the hon. Prime Minister is not going to have a half-an-hour

discussion, let us have at least two or three minutes more in order to put

some more questions on this subject.

Mr. Speaker: Yes.

Shri Braj Raj Singh: May I know whether Government's attention has been

drawn to the news item published in several papers alleging that the

Chinese have claimed some 30,000 sq. m. of our territory and they have

also disputed the MacMahon line?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: No, Sir; I would suggest to hon. Members not to pay

much attention to news items emanating sometimes from Hong Kong and

sometimes from other odd places. We have had no such claim directly or

indirectly made on us.

Shri Ranga: What is the usual procedure in regard to these matters in order

to come to some kind of settlement between the two Governments. It has

been stated that the Chinese Government was pleading an excuse that

these were all old maps. Have they got the latest maps? If they have got

the latest maps at all, may I know whether have our diplomatic

representative in China made any representations and also had any

discussions in order to see that there would be some understanding

between them and us in regard to this particular matter? There must be a

periodical revision of their own maps. If they are going to take umbrage

behind the Chiang Kai-shek's maps, what is the present position in regard

to our understanding with that Government about our boundaries?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I have just ventured to say something which is more

or less a reply to Mr. Ranga's question. I think the attitude taken up by the

Chinese Government in this matter is not at all an adequate answer. I

cannot reply on their behalf. I am merely pointing out, it is not a question

of our Ambassador raising the matter. I have raised it in personal letters

myself continually, apart from the Embassy raising it.

[Translation begins:

Shri Vajpayee: The Prime Minister has said just now that the Chinese

Government claims that the map was published in respect of Chiang

Kaishek. Does our Government accept this argument and if it does not, has

a formal protest been sent to the Chinese Government?

Translation ends.]

Mr. Speaker: That is what he has answered.

Shri Vajpayee: I want to know whether a formal protest has been launched.

[Translation begins:

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: Yes, the matter has been raised in as formal a

manner as it could be raised and the process still continues.

Translation ends.]

Shri Surendranath Dwivedy: The Prime, Minister told us not to attach much

importance to the news items appearing in the papers. May I know whether

his attention has been drawn to a reference made by Mr. Chou En-lai in the

Chinese National Assembly to the effect that boundaries between China and

other countries are to be settled again peacefully? Does it mean and has it

be.en enquired by our Ambassador that they do not accept the Macmahon

line as the border line between India and China?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I did see something, some kind of a report to that

effect. What exactly it means, I cannot interpret that. We are actually

corresponding on this issue with the Chinese Government. I would like to

wait for their answer before I interpret their meanings.

***

In the Lok Sabha: Restrictions on Consul-General in Lhasa70

Indian Consul-General in Lhasa

Question:71 Will the Prime Minister be pleased to state:

(a) whether it is a fact that our Consul-General in Lhasa was subjected to

restrictions regarding his movements since the current unrest in Tibet; (b)

if so, nature of these restrictions; and (c) whether these restrictions are still

in operation?

70 Reply to questions, 22 April 1959. Lok Sabha Debates, Second Series, Vol. XXX, cols

12759-12760.

71 By Congress MP SA Mehdi and PSP MP Bapu Nath Pai.

The Deputy Minister of External Affairs (Shrimati Lakshmi Menon): (a) to

(c). For some days after fighting broke out in Lhasa on the 20th March it

was impossible for the Consul-General and his staff to go out of the

premises of the Consulate General. The Vice-Director of the Foreign Bureau

told the Consul-General that in their own interest, except for very essential

work the personnel of the Consulate General should not leave their

premises. Chinese troops who were posted just outside the premises did

not allow any person to go out of the premises or come in. When the

Consul-General wished to go out on the 20th March to see the Indian

nationals and send some members of his staff to the market, the Chinese

guards informed him that they had to take up the matter with the Foreign

Bureau. The Consul General found it difficult even to send a letter to the

Foreign Bureau. Two or three days later, he was told by the guard that

persons who were in possession of identity cards with photographs

endorsed by the Foreign Bureau would be allowed to leave the premises.

On or about the 8th April the Chine se Foreign Bureau returned the identity

cards sent to them for endorsement and thereafter difficulties about the

movement of the staff disappeared. The Consul-General was informed by

the Foreign Bureau on April 11 that only cars with special permits of the

Military Control Commission could be used. He would be provided with a car

by the Contro1 Commission whenever he required one. On the 17th the

Foreign Bureau informed the Consul-General that he could use the

Consulate car without any special permit and that the staff of the

Consulate-General also could leave the premises without showing their

identity cards or pas sports of the guards. Since then all restrictions appear

to have been removed.

Shri S.A. Mehdi: Is it a fact that even wire1ess connection was cut off for

some time after that?

Shrimati Lakshrni Menon: No, Sir.

Shri Vajpayee: Are we to understand that our Mission in Lhasa was virtually

under house arrest in those days?

The Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs (Shri Jawaharlal Nehru):

No, Sir, that would not be correct. The facts indicate that conditions were

such in Lhasa, if I may say so, that for some time it was not completely

under the control of the Chinese authorities. As soon as they came more or

less under their control, they permitted the staff of the Consulate to go out;

but, not during the period when presumably the conditions were not wholly

under their control.

***

In the Rajya Sabha: Prince Peter of Greece on Tibet72

Maulana M. Faruqi:73 Will the Prime Minister be pleased to state

Government's attitude in regard to the allegations made by Prince Peter of

Greece to the effect that India rendered assistance to the Chinese

Government in over-running Tibet in 1950?

The Deputy Minister of External Affairs (Shrimati Lakshrni Menon): The

statement of Prince Peter of Greece referred to by the hon. Member is

entirely false and is a pure invention. It was contradicted officially on the

4th April, 1959 and again by the P.M. in bis press conference on 5th April,

1959.

72 Reply to questions, 23 April 1959. Rajya Sabha Debates, cols 444-447

73 Congress, Rajya Sabha MP from UP

[Translation Begins:

Maulana M. Faruqi: In the statement which Mr. Peter has given, he has said

that when China wanted to occupy Tibet in the beginning of 1950 then at

that time were trucks used in the transport at that time?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: You repeat the statement of Prince Peter and then

ask whether it is true or not? It is absolutely incorrect. What he said was

totally wrong and not only wrong but it is not included even in the

probabilities, that is, no vehicle can go on the other side through Sikkim.

Only mules go there.

Shri Nawab Singh Chauhan: Is it true that when the Dalai Lama reached

Tezpur, Prince Peter was given permission to go there? If this is true then

why are such people allowed to live in the country who make such wrong

statements?74

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: Strange questions are asked, Sir, which have no

relation to the events. I have no knowledge whether permission was given.

I did not give it, nor do I have any willingness to do so.

Translation ends.]

74 However on 21 April 1959, The Hindu reported: "In pursuance of the object of

preventing undesirable activities from the Indian territory, the Government would keep a

careful watch and take necessary precautionary measures. It is in pursuit of the same

object that the Government of India has now refused to give a visa to Prince Peter of

Greece to reenter India. The Prince who left India two years ago again applied for a visa

some time ago and even claimed that as he was permitted by the Government of India

several years ago to purchase a bungalow in Kalimpong he must be permitted to return.

Instructions have been sent to the appropriate Indian Embassy abroad to refuse the visa

to the Prince and also point out to him that the house in Kalimpong was purchased by him

as leader of the Danish mountaineering expedition and not in his personal capacity. Mr.

Nehru had described Prince Peter's allegations of Indian complicity in the Chinese

occupation of Tibet as a fantastic and despicable lie."

Shri N.M. Lingam: May I know, Sir, if the Greek Government has expressed

any view on the reported statement of this prince, and, if so, what it was?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: It does not concern the Greek Government of

course, but the Greek Government has indicated that they are in no way

responsible for what Prince Peter says.

Shri Bhupesh Gupta:75 May I know, Sir, for how long this Prince lived in

Kalimpong and in Darjeeling, and whether during his stay there the

Government received any information through the Central Intelligence

Bureau and through the Press about his anti-Indian activities?

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I cannot give the exact period of his stay there but

he lived there for a number of years. He also acquired some house

property. Some of his activities were not considered desirable by

Government either by the Government of West Bengal or by the

Government of India and it was suggested to him that it would be better if

he left Kalimpong and indeed, India. Subsequently, I think, because of

illness, either his illness or his wife's, the period of his stay was extended a

little longer. Later he left.

Shri Bhupesh Gupta: May I know exactly when the communication from the

Government of West Bengal reached the External Affairs Ministry here and

the Prime Minister came to know otherwise of his activities and why there

was so much delay in dealing with a case against whom a report had

already been sent to the Centre and also spoken about in the Press?

75 CPI, Rajya Sabha MP from West Bengal

Shri Jawaharlal Nehru: I cannot give the exact date and say exactly when I

can only say that this matter has been a pending matter for some years.

But finally, I think, it must be about two years ago or so, and the reason

why we have not taken a decision is that we extended the period of his stay

there, because we were told that his wife was very ill.

Shri Bhupesh Gupta: It appears that in a Calcutta Paper, Jugantar, Amrita

Bazar Group, a statement has appeared of Prof. Delani, who is a French

national teaching something in that area. She complains in the letter that

she was approached by somebody, some important people, for doing

espionage work with regard to certain things, to which the attention of the

Government was also drawn.

May I know, Sir, whether Prince Peter was one of those people approaching

her and if so, what action the Government has taken in the light of this

public statement this lady had made?

Mr. Chairman: This is another question. It does not arise out of that

question.

***

In the Rajya Sabha: Indian Traders in Tibet76

Shri Nawab Singh Chauhan: Will the Prime Minister be pleased to state:

(a) whether it is a fact that the Indian Traders Union of Tibet has requested

the Government of India to approach the Chinese Government for the

removal of their difficulties in Tibet in connection with their trade and daily

life?

76 Reply to questions, 23 April1959. Rajya Sabha Debates, Vol. XXV, cols 493-498

(b) if the answer to part (a) above be in the affirmative; what are the

difficulties experienced by the Indian traders there; and what steps have so

far been taken by Government in this respect and with what results; and

(c) what steps have been taken by Government for the safety of Indian

traders during the recent disturbances in Tibet?

The Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs (Shri Jawaharlal Nehru):

(a) and (b). The Government of India have received no request recently

from the Indian Traders Union in Tibet for the removal of their difficulties. A

statement explaining the action taken on the memorandum of the

Bharatiya Vyapari Sangh Yatung presented by their representatives to

Prime Minister in October, 1958 is placed on the Table of the House.

(c) During the recent disturbances it was difficult for our Consul General

and the Trade Agents to move about freely or to contact the Indian

nationals. We spoke to the Chinese authorities and expressed our hope that

full protection would be given to Indian nationals generally. We were

assured that wherever Chinese troops were posted our nationals would be

given protection.

STATEMENT

Action taken on the memorandum presented to the Prime Minister of India

by the Bharatiya Vyapari Sangh Yatung

(i) Landing certificate for grant of rebate on excisable goods. - The

Government of India is considering how far the existing procedure can be

revised.

(ii) Delegation of powers to the Indian Trade Agent, Yatung to renew pas

sports held by Indian traders.- The traders are not issued pas sports but

hold traders' certificates prescribed under Article V(I) of the Sino-Indian

Agreement of 1954. The existing practice under which these certificates are

renewed by the Sikkim Checkposts is working satisfactorily and no change

is considered desirable.

(iii) Running of private vehicles and purchase of lands in Tibet.- According

to paragraphs (ii) and (13) of the Notes exchanged between the

Governments of India and China on 29th April, 1954 Indian traders can hire

means of transportation at normal and reasonable rates and also rent

buildings and godowns in accordance with the local regulations. The local

regulations do not permit the owning of lands and vehicles by foreigners in

Tibet.

(iv) Recognition of Bharatiya Vyapari Sangh.-This question is being taken

up with the authorities of China.

(v) Trade permits for foreign goods.-There are no restrictions on export to

Tibet from India of foreign imported goods but under the Indo-China Trade

Agreement of 1954 import permits for re-export to Tibet cannot be granted

excepting the goods of Chinese origin.

(vi) Export quota of iron and steel and rice, etc.. It has not been possible to

meet the request of the Yatung traders that monthly quota of 100 tons of

iron and steel should exclusively be given to them as the traders of

Kalimpong who have been trading in Tibet since time immemorial have also

to be accommodated. For purposes of proper coordination it is also not

practicable to authorise Political Officer in Sikkim to issue the quota

certificates.

The Government of India is considering how far, in view of the acute

shortage of food in the country, a rice quota can be allocated for-Tibet.

(vii) Petrol, Lubricants, diesel oil etc.- The request of the Yatung traders

that the quota of the above articles reserved for Tibet should be given to

Indian traders of Yatung and Phari, cannot be accepted as the existing

practice of giving permits to bona fide traders on the recommendations of

the Indian Trade Agents and Consul General, Lhasa has worked well and is

considered equitable.

***

To Congress Workers: Be Calm77

Mussoorie, April .24-Prime Minister Nehru today said that the question of

Tibet was a complicated one and "would cause a lot of worry as different

countries are involved in it."

He was addressing Congress workers here soon after his arrival from Dehra

Dun this morning.

Pandit Nehru said: "The Dalai Lama has not come here for mere pleasure,

although you may be happy that Mussoorie was chosen for his stay in

India. His coming is related to the circumstances that arose in Tibet. These

are complicated circumstances and will cause a lot of worry to different

countries which have relations with it (Tibet). Now, in this matter,

sentiments and emotions are certainly aroused and there is an element of

passion also. But we have to ponder over these things with a cool and caIrn

mind. We should not be swept away by any sentiment or passion because

international relations are involved."

The Prime Minister said that other countries were interested in the Tibetan

question and India had relations with these countries. "I, therefore, want

that all people should exercise wisdom and restraint and feel a sense of

responsibility in saying anything on this matter. Whatever the sympathies

of people might be over this issue-they have a right to express them - but

giving an opinion on these complicated matters when full facts are not

known is not a very responsible thing to do."

77 Report of speech, Mussoorie, 24 April 1959. From The National Herald, 25 Apri1 1959

Pandit Nehru asked the citizens of Mussoorie to remember that they should

not do anything that might disturb the Dalai Lama.

"I do not mean to say that you will do anything conscious to disturb him,

but you should not crowd round his house and disturb his thought," he said.

The Dalai Lama, he added, should be allowed to live in peace. "You must

remember that during the last month the Dalai Lama had to undertake a

very big and difficult journey and the circumstances of the journey were

also painful to the Dalai Lama. So it is only proper that the Dalai Lama

should get an opportunity in a peaceful atmosphere to consult his

colleagues on the ups and downs in Tibet and get over the mental strain."

***

To B.P. Chaliha: Tibetan Refugees78

Thank you for your telegram 23459 of April 24.79 We shall certainly give

you every possible assistance, but our idea is that the camp should be

purely temporary and arrangements for accommodation and feeding of the

refugees need not be made on an elaborate scale. We do not contemplate

keeping these refugees for a long period in camp or making financial and

other provisions for them as in the case of the Indian refugees from Burma

during the war. Nor is it our intention to draw up any long-term plan for the

settlement of these refugees in India. We think that after the first rush is

over, the frontier itself will be sealed by the Chinese and not many will be

able to come in later. Our intention is that after those who have come in

have been accommodated in a temporary camp and their details are sorted

out, they will be asked to shift for themselves and if necessary we shall give

them some ad hoc financial assistance. I agree that Tezpur is not an ideal

78 Telegram, 25 April 1959

79 See Appendix 14, pp. 594-595

location for Tibetan refugees, but no alternative arrangement at a more

suitable place is practicable in the short time at our disposal.

2. We shall certainly send you some Tibetan knowing staff. Your proposal

for sending two or three responsible persons from the Dalai Lama's

entourage to help in the sorting out of the refugees is a good one and we

are making immediate enquiries in this respect. There are certain obvious

political objections to Government sponsoring a relief fund or making a

public appeal. In fact we shall have to take care to prevent individuals and

organisations from making political capital of the plight of these unfortunate

refugees. A Central Relief Committee has been set up in Delhi and I have

asked the Ministry of External Affairs to discuss with the organisers how

they can assist.

***

To Sampurnanand: The Dalai Lama80

25th April, 1959

My dear Sampurnanand,

I am sorry to learn from the press that you are laid up with gout. That is a

very troublesome matter. Fortunately I have never had it.

I went day before yesterday to Dehra Dun and yesterday to Mussoorie for

various functions. I had a long talk with the Dalai Lama. I returned this

morning. I have impressed upon the local officials in Mussoorie to avoid

making too much of a fuss of the Dalai Lama's stay there. Uptil now, there

has been much too much evidence of this kind of thing. The Dalai Lama can

go wherever he likes, so can the people in his entourage. They are not in

detention. I have told the Dalai Lama that while it would be desirable to

80 Letter. Sampurnanand Collection, NA!. Also available in JN Collection

avoid going to crowded localities, he can go for a drive anywhere in

Mussoorie and he can go for a walk in the quieter parts of Mussoorie

roundabout where he lives.

Yours sincerely,

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

To Y.B. Chavan: Defacing of Mao's Picture81

April 26, 1959

My dear Chavan,

The Chinese Ambassador has protested to us in regard to a recent

demonstration in Bombay when, it is said, the demonstrators posted a

picture of Chairman Mao Tse-tung of the Chine se People's Republic on the

Chinese Consulate building and threw tomatoes at the picture. It is further

said that the police were present on the scene. Later the police cleared the

crowd to enable photographers to take pictures.82

I am sorry that such a demonstration took place. I do not know who is

responsible. Perhaps the P.S.P. or some Party did it. Whatever our views

may be about Tibet, it is highly improper to insult the head of a great State

in this way. We have already expressed our regret to the Chinese

Embassy.83 I think, however, that you might have some enquiry made into

this and find out why the police permitted this kind of thing to be done. In

future, care should be taken to prevent such demonstrations.

I am very glad to learn that you have largely recovered in health. I hope

you will not rush back to work. 81 Chief Minister of Bombay.

82 The Chinese Government sent a formal protest note on 27 April 1959. See Appendix 15,

pp. 595-596 and item 143, pp, 510-511.

83 For GOI’s formal reply of 30 April 1959, see Appendix 16, pp. 596-598.

Yours sincerely,

Jawaharlal Nehru

***

To Subimal Dutt: Chinese Forces Advance84

The Chief Minister of the Punjab came to see me this afternoon. He spoke

about a place named Kaurik on the border of Lahul-Spiti and Tibet. The

Punjab Government has placed a check-post there which apparently

remains at the place throughout the year. Information has reached the

Punjab Government that Chinese forces have come right up to the border

and have blocked the passage preventing people from going across or

coming in. He was a little apprehensive of these forces trying to come right

up to Kaurik. He said that he was issuing orders to the check-post not to

give way. I agreed with him.

***

In the Lok Sabha: Permits for Trade with Tibet85

Shri Hem Barna: Will the Prime Minister be pleased to state:

(a) Whether it is a fact that Indian Traders have to obtain permits for their

different commodities of trade with Tibet from the Political Officer at

Gangtok in Sikkim;

(b) If so, whether it is a fact that this procedure involves great difficulties

so far as these traders are concerned; and

84 Note, 26 April 1959

85 Reply to questions, 27 April 1959. Lok Sabha Debates, Second Series, Vol. XXX, col.

13486.

(c) If so, what steps, if any, Government propose to take to improve the

situation?

The Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs (Shri Jawaharlal Nehru):

(a) to (c). It has been arranged that permits be issued by the Political

Officer, Sikkim, who is on the spot and can therefore assess the need for

commodities exported more accurately. There have been no complaints

against this system of issuing permits which seems to be working

satisfactory and as such no further action in the matter is proposed to be

taken.

***

In the Lok Sabha: Statement on Situation in Tibet86

The Prime Minister and Minister of External Affairs (Shri Jawaharlal Nehru):

Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have made several statements in the House in regard to

the developments in Tibet. The last statement was made on April 3, in

which I informed the House that the Dalai Lama had entered the territory of

the Indian Union with a large entourage.87 I should like to bring this

information up-to date and to place such additional facts as we have before

the House.

A few days ago, the Dalai Lama and his party reached Mussoorie, where

Government had made arrangements for their stay. I have had occasion to

visit Mussoorie since then and have had a long talk with the Dalai Lama.

In the course of the last few days, reports have reached us that

considerable numbers of Tibetans, numbering some thousands, have

recently crossed into the Kameng Frontier Division of the North East

86 27 April 1959. Lok Sabha Debates. Second Series, Vol. XXX, cols 13493-13503.

87 See item 107, pp. 435-437

Frontier Agency and some hundreds have also entered the territory of

Bhutan. They sought asylum, and we have agreed to this. Such of them as

carried arms were disarmed. We do not know the exact number yet.

Temporary arrangements are being made in a Camp for their maintenance

until they can be dispersed in accordance with their wishes and the

necessities governing such cases. We could not leave these refugees to

their own resources. Apart from the humanitarian considerations involved,

there was also the law and order problem to be considered. We are grateful

to the Government of Assam for their help and cooperation in this matter.

So far as the Dalai Lama and his party are concerned, we had to take

adequate measures on grounds of security and also to protect them from

large numbers of newspaper correspondents, both Indian and foreign, who,

in their anxiety to obtain first-hand information in regard to a matter of

world importance, were likely to harass and almost overwhelm the Dalai

Lama and his party. While we were anxious to give protection to the Dalai

Lama and his party, we were agreeable to giving these newspapermen

suitable opportunities to see him. I had received an appeal from nearly 75

representatives of news agencies and newspapers from Tezpur requesting

me to give them such opportunities. A senior officer of the External Affairs

Ministry88 was, therefore, deputed to proceed to Tezpur in advance to deal

with the press representatives and photographers who had assembled in

that small town of Assam. This officer made the necessary administrative

arrangements to meet, as far as possible, the wishes of the newspapermen

to see the Dalai Lama and to photograph him. Soon after entering India,

the Dalai Lama indicated his wish to make a statement. We were later

informed that this statement would be released at Tezpur. Our officer made

arrangements for the distribution of a translation of the statement to the

newspaper correspondents.

88 S. Sen.

In view of certain irresponsible charges made, I should like to make it clear

that the Dalai Lama was entirely responsible for this statement as well as

for a subsequent briefer statement that was made by him from Mussoorie.

Our officers had nothing to do with the drafting or preparation of these

statements.

I need not tell the House that the Dalai Lama entered India entirely of his

own volition. At no time had we suggested that he should come to India.

We had naturally given thought to the possibility of his seeking asylum in

India and when such a request came, we readily granted it. His entry with a

large party in a remote corner of our country created special problems of

transport, organisation and security. We deputed an officer to meet the

Dalai Lama and his party at Bomdila and to escort them to Mussoorie. The

particular officer was selected because he had served as Consul-General in

Lhasa and therefore was to some extent known to the Dalai Lama and his

officials.89 The selection of Mussoorie for the Dalai Lama's stay was not

finalised till his own wishes were ascertained in the matter and he agreed to

it. There was no desire on our part to put any undue restrictions on him,

but in the special circumstances, certain arrangements had necessarily to

be made to prevent any mishap. It should be remembered that the various

events in Tibet, culminating in the Dalai Lama's departure from Lhasa and

entry into India had created tremendous interest among the people of India

and in the world press. After arrival in Mussoorie, steps were taken to

prevent the Dalai Lama from being harassed by crowds of people trying to

see him as well as by newspapermen. Apart from this, no restrictions about

movement were placed on him. He has been told that he and his party can

move about Mussoorie according to their wishes. It should be remembered

that the Dalai Lama has recently not only had a long strenuous and

dangerous journey, but has also had harrowing experiences which must

89 P. N. Menon

affect the nerves of even a hardened person. He is only just 24 years of

age.

These are some bare facts, but behind these facts lie serious developments

which may have far reaching consequences. Tragedy has been and is being

enacted in Tibet, passions have been let loose, charges made and language

used which cannot but worsen the situation and our relations with our

northern neighbour. I am sure that the House will agree with me that in

considering matters of such high import, we should exercise restraint and

wisdom and use language which is moderate and precise. ln these days of

cold war, there has been a tendency to use unrestrained language and

often to make wild charges without any justification. We have fortunately

kept out of the cold war and I hope that on this, as on any other occasion,

we shall not use the language of cold war. The matter is too serious to be

dealt with in a trivial or excited way. I would, therefore, appeal to the press

and the public to exercise restraint in language. I regret that occasionally

there have been lapses from this on our side. In particular, I regret that

grave discourtesy was shown some days ago to a picture of the head of the

Chinese State, Chairman Mao Tse-tung. This was done by a small group of

irresponsible people in Bombay. In the excitement of the moment, we

cannot allow ourselves to be swept away into wrong courses.

It is not for me to make any similar appeal to the leaders, the press and the

people of China. All I can say is that I have been greatly distressed at the

tone of the comments and the charges made against India by responsible

people in China.90 They have used the language of cold war regardless of

truth and propriety. This is peculiarly distressing in a great nation with

90 In a speech to the second session of the National People's Congress in Peking on 18

April 1959, Chou En-lai said: "Although the Dalai Lama has been abducted to India, we

still hope he will be able to free himself from the duress of the rebels and return to the

motherland." A sharp anti-India campaign developed in the Chinese press during this

period

thousands of years of culture behind it, noted for its restrained and polite

behaviour. The charges made against India are so fantastic that I find it

difficult to deal with them. There is the charge of our keeping the Dalai

Lama under duress. The Chinese authorities should surely know how we

function in this country and what our laws and Constitution are. Even if we

were so inclined, we could not keep the Dalai Lama under some kind of

detention against his will, and there can be no question of our wishing to do

so. We can gain nothing by it except the burden of difficult problems. In

any event, this matter can be easily cleared. It is open to the Dalai Lama at

any time to go back to Tibet or wherever he wants to. As the Panchen Lama

has made himself responsible specially for some strange statements, I have

stated that we would welcome him to come to India and meet the Dalai

Lama himself. Should he choose to do so, every courtesy will be extended

to him.91 I have further said that the Chinese Ambassador or any other

emissary of the Chinese Government can come to India for this purpose

and meet the Dalai Lama. There is no barrier for anyone to come peacefully

to India, and whether we agree with him or not, we shall treat him with the

courtesy due to a guest.

Another and an even stranger allegation has been made about "Indian

expansionists" who, it is alleged, are inheritors of the British tradition of

imperialism and expansion. It is perfectly true that British policy was one of

91 According to The Hindu of 30 April 1959 , the Panchen Lama said at the Chinese People's

Political Consultative Conference in Peking on 29 April: "If the Indian Prime Minister meant

that he hoped I would go to India to enter into talks on the so-called Tibet question, then I

must point out that the Tibet question can be solved only in Tibet." The New China News

Agency also quoted him as saying about his trip to India in 1956: "some Indian officials

often showed a certain discrimination against me in arranging receptions.

My entourage had to sleep on the trains sometimes because they were not provided with

housing." He also complained that the stupa at Samath and several monasteries "were in a

poor state."

expansion into Tibet and that they carried this out by force of arms early in

this century. That was, in our opinion, an unjustified and cruel adventure

which brought much harm to the Tibetans. As a result of that, the then

British Government in India established certain extra territorial rights in

Tibet. When India became independent, we inherited some of these rights.

Being entirely opposed to any such extra territorial rights in another

country, we did not wish to retain them. But in the early days after

Independence and Partition, our hands were full, as this House well knows,

and we had to face very difficult situations in our own country. We ignored,

if I may say so, Tibet. Not being able to find a suitable person to act as our

representative at Lhasa, we allowed for some time the existing British

representative to continue at Lhasa. Later an Indian took his place. Soon

after the Chinese armies entered Tibet, the question of these extra

territorial rights was raised and we readily agreed to give them up. We

would have given them up anyhow, whatever developments might have

taken place in Tibet. We withdrew our army detachments from some places

in Tibet and handed over Indian postal and telegraph installations and rest

houses. We laid down the Five Principles of the Panchsheel and placed our

relationship with the Tibet region on a new footing.

What we were anxious about was to preserve the traditional connections

between India and Tibet in regard to pilgrim traffic and trade, our action in

this matter and whatever we have done subsequently in regard to Tibet is

proof enough of our policy and that India had no political or ulterior

ambitions in Tibet. Indeed, even from the narrowest practical point of view,

any other policy would have been wrong and futile. Ever since then we

have endeavoured not only to act up to the agreement we made, but to

cultivate the friendship of the Chinese State and people.

It is therefore, a matter of the deepest regret and surprise to us that

charges should be made which are both unbecoming and entirely void of

substance. We have conveyed this deep feeling of regret to the Chinese

Government, more especially at the speeches delivered recently in the

current session of the National People's Congress in Peking.

I stated some time ago that our broad policy was governed by three

factors: (1) the preservation of the security and integrity of India; (2) our

desire to maintain friendly relations with China; and (3) our deep sympathy

for the people of Tibet. That policy we shall continue to follow because we

think that a correct policy not only for the present but even more so for the

future. It would be a tragedy if the two great countries of Asia, India and

China, which have been peaceful neighbours for ages past, should develop

feelings of hostility against each other. We for our part will follow this

policy, but we hope that China also will do likewise and that nothing will be

said or done which endangers the friendly relations of the two countries

which are so important from the wider point of view of the peace of Asia

and the world. The Five Principles have laid down, inter alia mutual respect

for each other. Such mutual respect is gravely impaired if unfounded

charges are made and the language of cold war used, I have already made

it clear previously that the charge that Kalimpong was the centre of the

Tibetan rebellion is wholly unjustified. We have a large number of people of

Tibetan stock living in India as Indian nationals. We have also some Tibetan

émigrés in India. All of these deeply respect the Dalai Lama. Some of these

have been exceedingly unhappy at developments in Tibet; some, no doubt,

have anti-Chinese sentiments. We have made it clear to them that they will

not be permitted to carry on any subversive activities from India, and I

should like to say that by and large they have acted in accordance with the

directions of the Government of India. I cannot obviously say that someone

has not done something secretly, but to imagine or say that a small group

of persons sitting in Kalimpong organised a major upheaval in Tibet seems

to me to make a large draft on imagination and to slur over obvious facts.

The Khampa revolt started in an area of China proper adjoining Tibet more

than three years ago. Is Kalimpong supposed to be responsible for that?

This revolt gradually spread and, no doubt, created a powerful impression

on the minds of large numbers of Tibetans who had kept away from the

revolt. Fears and apprehensions about their future gripped their minds and

the nationalist upsurge swayed their feelings. Their fears may have been un

justified, but surely they cannot be denied. Such feelings can only be dealt

with adequately by gentler methods than warfare.

When Premier Chou En-lai came here two or three years ago, he was good

enough to discuss Tibet with me at considerable length. We had a frank and

full talk. He told me that while Tibet had long been a part of the Chinese

State, they did not consider Tibet as a province of China. The people were

different from the people of China proper, just as in other autonomous

regions of the Chinese State the people were different, even though they

formed part of that State. Therefore, they considered Tibet an autonomous

region which would enjoy autonomy. He told me further that it was absurd

for anyone to imagine that China was going to force communism on Tibet.

Communism could not be enforced in this way on a very backward country

and they had no wish to do so even though they would like reforms to

come in progressively. Even these reforms they proposed to postpone for a

considerable time.

About that time, the Dalai Lama was also here and I had long talks with

him then, I told him of Premier Chou En-lai's friendly approach and of his

assurance that he would respect the autonomy of Tibet. I suggested to him

that he should accept these assurances in good faith and cooperate in

maintaining that autonomy and bringing about certain reforms in Tibet. The

Dalai Lama agreed that his country, though, according to him, advanced

spiritually, was very backward socially and economically and reforms were

needed.

It is not for us to say how far these friendly intentions and approaches

materialise. The circumstances were undoubtedly difficult. On the one side

there was a dynamic, rapidly moving society; on the other, a static,

unchanging society fearful of what might be done to it in the name of

reform. The distance between the two was great and there appeared to be

hardly any meeting point. Meanwhile, change in some forms inevitably

came to Tibet. Communications developed rapidly and the long isolation of

Tibet was partly broken through. Though physical barriers were

progressively removed, mental and emotional barriers increased.

Apparently, the attempt to cross these mental and emotional barriers was

either not made or did not succeed.

To say that a number of 'upper strata reactionaries' in Tibet were solely

responsible for this appears to be an extraordinary simplification of a

complicated situation. Even according to the accounts received through

Chinese sources, the revolt in Tibet was of considerable magnitude and the

basis of it must have been a strong feeling of nationalism which affects not

only upper class people but others also. No doubt, vested interests joined it

and sought to profit by it. The attempt to explain a situation by the use of

rather worn-out words, phrases and slogans, is seldom helpful.

When the news of these unhappy developments came to India, there was

immediately a strong and widespread reaction. The Government did not

bring about this reaction. Nor was this reaction essentially political. It was

largely one of sympathy based on sentiment and humanitarian reasons.

Also on a certain feeling of kinship with the Tibetan people derived from

long-established religious and cultural contacts. It was an instinctive

reaction. It is true that some people in India sought to profit by it by

turning it in an undesirable direction. But the fact of that reaction of the

Indian people was there. If that was the reaction here, one may well

imagine the reaction among the Tibetans themselves. Probably this reaction

is shared in the other Buddhist countries of Asia. When there are such

strong feelings, which are essentially not political, they cannot be dealt with

by political methods alone, much less by military methods, we have no

desire whatever to interfere in Tibet; we have every desire to maintain the

friendship between India and China, but at the same time, we have every

sympathy for the people of Tibet, and we are greatly distressed at their

hapless plight. We hope still that the authorities of China, in their wisdom,

will not use their great strength against the Tibetans but will win them to

friendly Cooperation in accordance with the assurances they have

themselves given about the autonomy of the Tibet region. Above all, we

hope that the present fighting and killing will cease.

As I have said above, I had a long talk with the Dalai Lama three days ago

at Mussoorie. He told me of the difficulties he had to face, of the growing

resentment of his people at the conditions existing there and how he

sought to restrain them, of his feelings that the religion of the Buddha,

which was more to him than life itself, was being endangered. He said that

up to the last moment he did not wish to leave Lhasa. It was only on the

afternoon of the 17th March, when, according to him, some shells were

fired at his palace and fell in a pond nearby, that the sudden decision was

taken to leave Lhasa. Within a few hours the same day he and his party left

Lhasa and took the perilous journey to the Indian frontier. The departure

was so hurried that even an adequate supply of clothes, etc., could not be

brought. When I met the Dalai Lama, no member of his entourage was

present. Even the interpreter was our own. The Dalai Lama told me that the

two statements which had been issued were entirely his own and there was

no question of anybody coercing him to make them. Even though he is

young, I could not easily imagine that he could be coerced into doing

something he did not wish. All my sympathy goes out to this young man

who at an early age has had to shoulder heavy burdens and to face

tremendous responsibilities. During the last few weeks, he has suffered

great physical and mental strain. I advised him to rest for a white and not

to take any hurried decisions. He felt very unhappy at conditions in Tibet

and was especially anxious that fighting should stop.

***

To Subimal Dutt: Regret at Defacing of Mao's Picture92

In reply to this protest,93 you might state that we deeply regret this

incident and in fact the Prime Minister has already expressed his regret in

Parliament. We have enquired into the matter. The facts are not wholly as

stated in the Chinese Memorandum. More particularly the suggestion that

the police connived at all this is not correct. I think you might give in your

reply or separately a brief summary of the police report.

You might add that under our law processions cannot be banned so long as

they function peacefully. In fact the Chinese Embassy must be aware of

such processions being held even near Parliament House from time to time

and indulging in highly objectionable slogans not only against the Prime

Minister but even against Mahatma Gandhi. An incident occurred when

portraits of Mahatma Gandhi and the Prime Minister were taken out by

some irresponsible persons and treated in an insulting way. Under our law,

a great deal of latitude is allowed to people so long as they do not indulge

in actual violence.

It might be pointed out further that this misbehaviour was on the part of a

small party called the Socialist Party which broke away from the major

Socialist Party, namely, the Praja Socialist Party, some years ago. It is the

92 Note, 27 April 1959

93 See Appendix 15, pp. 595-596

definite programme of this party to indulge in highly objectionable

behaviour towards Government. It is a small group of no importance.

In any event, we deeply regret that such discourtesy was shown to a

picture of Chairman Mao Tse-tung.

You might add that white we can understand and appreciate the

resentment of the Chinese Embassy to such an incident, we regret the

language used in the Memorandum. It should be clear to the Chinese

Embassy that this deplorable incident was the act of a few persons and

there was certainly no question of connivance of the police or the

Government. Further that under our laws civil liberty is guaranteed and

under its cover even misbehaviour can take place to some extent.94

***

For the Lok Sabha Secretariat: Pro- and Anti-Chinese Propaganda95

The Lok Sabha Secretariat might be informed that it will hardly be desirable

to answer the question attached. There has, of course, been some

distribution of pro-China propaganda by the Communist Party. There has

also been much propaganda against China by other parties. To some extent

all this is allowed. It is only when it goes beyond normal limits that

objection is taken. Such objection is taken only in special cases.

2. If this question is put up for answer, the other aspect is also likely to be

put forward.

***

To G. Parthasarathi: China and the Dalai Lama96

94 For GOI’s reply of 30 April, see Appendix 16, pp. 596-598.

95 Note, 27 April 1959.

I have seen your messages and text of resolution of National People's

Congress on Tibet. You must have seen my statements in Parliament and

our communications to Chinese Government. On 4th May there will be

debate on Tibet in Rajya Sabha.97 I shall adopt the same line there.

2. I am leaving Delhi for three days. Recent developments in Tibet have

raised difficult problems not only for India but for China also and of course

for Tibet itself. I can appreciate to some extent Chinese attitude,

constituted as Chinese are at present. We realise that Tibet is very

backward. Nevertheless the regimented and virulent attacks on India in

China and their insistence on patent falsehoods have surprised and

distressed me. It seems to me that Chinese authorities have developed a

habit of trying to bully and imagine that offensive language will produce

results they desire. It produces exactly opposite results in any self-

respecting country. It is difficult enough to restrain these strong reactions

in India, but we shall do so. Our general policy will remain firm though not

unfriendly to China. We realise the importance of these friendly relations,

but friendship cannot be obtained by threats and coercive attitude. If

Chinese friendship is necessary for India, so is Indian friendship for China.

The time for any country to display arrogance in dealing with India is long

past. We have still some remains of what we learnt from Gandhiji. We shall,

therefore, continue to be polite and seek friendship and at the same time to

hold firmly to the policy we consider correct.

3. It seems to me that Chinese would very much like to get Dalai Lama

back and his remaining in India is a continuing affront and irritation to

them. As I have said, Dalai Lama can go back if he so wishes but there is

96 Telegram to Indian Ambassador to China, 29 April 1959.

97 See SWJN/SS/49/pp. 545-555

no chance of his going back unless circumstances change radically. This

means also that relations of India and China will remain tense even though

we might avoid crises,

4. I do not know if you will have any chance of talking informally to people

who count. If so, you might explain to them how opposition parties have

full freedom to function here and in fact they frequently hold

demonstrations against Government and criticise it in strong language.

Obviously this is not understood in China where no opposition is allowed.

Also that during twelve years of our Independence, no country, big or

small, has used such offensive language towards India as Chinese leaders

and press recently. In spite of this grave provocation, we have remembered

Gandhiji and will continue to keep our tempers.98

***

At Birpur: Talk with Correspondents99

Nehru: It will be Good if Dalai Lama Can Really Return Home

Kathmandu, May 2 - lf the Dalai Lama "can really return" to Lhasa that

would be good for all concerned, Prime Minister Nehru told a group of

Nepalese journalists in a special interview on Thursday on the banks of the

Kosi.100

The Prime Minister met the correspondents from Kathmandu after his talks

with King Mahendra at Birpur on the India-Nepal border.

98 For Parthasarathi's reply of 3 May 1959, see Appendix 18, pp. 601-603.

99 30 Apri11959. From the National Herald, 3 May 1959

100 See also item 171, pp. 546-548

Asked, if the present relations between India and China would improve if

the Dalai Lama came to Nepal, Pandit Nehru is reported to have said that

he did not know.

He is reported to have said that the Chinese were asking that the Dalai

Lama should return to Tibet and they believed that his return would help.

He refused to comment when asked whether he personally thought that the

Dalai Lama's return to Tibet would ease the situation there. He is quoted as

having stated: "I cannot say anything on this."

Answering a question about the Dalai Lama's going to Nepal "which is

between India and China" could help the Prime Minister is reported to have

said that the Dalai Lama was absolutely free to go and stay anywhere he

liked. "He is a free agent and can even go back to Tibet." He added that

this could, of course, be good for all concerned "if he can really return to

Tibet."

Pandit Nehru estimated that about five-thousand Tibetan refugees had

crossed into India and Bhutan. He then asked Gen. Subarna Shamsher,

Chairman of the Nepalese Council of Ministers, who was also there how

many Tibetan refugees had come into Nepal and was told that "there might

have been small groups of them who have come to Nepal but it is difficult

to distinguish a refugee and other people."

Pandit Nehru is also reported to have told the Nepalese newsmen that India

was prepared to review the Indo-Nepalese trade agreement.